NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts
description
Transcript of NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts
![Page 1: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/1.jpg)
NEES Quake SummitThursday July 12, 2012
Seismic DesignIn Massachusetts
Eric M. HinesPrincipal, LeMessurier Consultants, BostonProfessor of Practice, Tufts University
0.06
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
SOURCE-to-SITE DISTANCE (km
)
0
50
300
350
6.0
6.5
7.0
4.5 5.
0 5.5 6.
0 6.5 7.
0 7.5
MAG
NITU
DE (M
w)
24
68
10%
Con
trib
utio
n to
Haz
ardDeaggregation
for Boston2% in 50 yearsT = 1.0 sec
Deaggregationfor Los Angeles2% in 50 yearsT = 1.0 sec
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
SOURCE-to-SITE DISTANCE (km
)7.5
5.5 6.
0 6.5 7.
0 7.5 8.
0
MAG
NITU
DE (M
w)
1020
3040
% C
ontr
ibut
ion
to H
azar
d
![Page 2: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/2.jpg)
UBC 1970-1973
OCBF: V = 1820kSMRF: V = 753k
![Page 3: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/3.jpg)
UBC 1976-1985
OCBF: V = 3067kSMRF: V = 1149k
![Page 4: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/4.jpg)
ATC 3-06 1978; MSBC 1997
OCBF: V = 1152kSMRF: V = 497k
![Page 5: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/5.jpg)
988 km
IBC 2006 (USGS 2002); MSBC 20082% in 50 year, Sa for T = 1.0s
OCBF: V = 985kSMRF: V = 273k
0.06
![Page 6: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/6.jpg)
UBC 1970-1973
UBC 1976-1985
ATC 3-06 1978;MSBC 199710% in 50 year
IBC 2006 (USGS 2002); MSBC 20082% in 50 year
SMRF OCBF
753 1820
1149 3067
497 1152
273 985
LA/Bos1.0
1.33
4.0
3.5-6.5
![Page 7: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/7.jpg)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 350.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.055
2%-50yr
City Sequence #
Pro
babi
lity
of C
olla
pse
in 5
0yrs
Southern California Northern California Pacific NW Intermountain CEUS
![Page 8: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/8.jpg)
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 350.005
0.01
0.015
0.02
0.025
0.03
0.035
0.04
0.045
0.05
0.055
MCER
City Sequence #
Pro
babi
lity
of C
olla
pse
in 5
0yrs
Southern California Northern California Pacific NW Intermountain CEUS
NorthridgeRiverside
San Bernardino
Oakland San Jose
Concord
San Francisco
San MateoSanta Cruz
Vallejo
Santa Rosa
![Page 9: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/9.jpg)
1 2 3 4 5 60.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25 Los AngelesSan BernardinoSan DiegoOaklandSacramentoSan FranciscoSanta RosaSeattlePortlandMemphisCharleston
1976 UBC 1997 UBC1994 UBC 1997 NEHRP 2009 NEHRP
Special Moment Frame Base Shear
![Page 10: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/10.jpg)
(Prof. L.G. Baise, Tufts University)
Hines , Baise and Swift (JSE—2011)
FILL = 20 feetVs = 600 ft/s
ORGANICS = 12 feetVs = 450 ft/s
SAND AND GRAVEL = 12 feetVs = 950 ft/s
SILTY CLAY = 90 feetVs = 800 ft/s
BEDROCK
GLACIAL TILL = 12 feetVs = 950 ft/ssoil profile adapted from: E.G. Johnson, “Geotechnical Characteristics of the Boston Area,” Civil Engineering Practice,1989
Vsavg = 695 ft/s
Site Class D:1996 Maps = Category C2002 Maps = Category B
new Mass Code maintainsspecial provisions based on40 years of practice
![Page 11: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/11.jpg)
13’ Typ.18’
30’-0” 30’-0” 30’-0”
Concentrically Braced Frame (Typ.)
5 @ 30’-0” = 150’-0”
1’ slab overhangin each direction
5 @ 30’-0” = 150’-0”
W14x22 (Typ.)
W21x44 (Typ.)
W16x36 (Typ.)
W21x44 (Typ.)
9-Story Concentrically Braced Frame
Design loadwith 0% Eccentricity
Mass and LFRSfor ½ of building
Hines , Appel and Cheever (EJ—2009)
![Page 12: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/12.jpg)
![Page 13: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/13.jpg)
![Page 14: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/14.jpg)
Hines & Fahnestock (Toronto—2010)
Reserve System Concept
![Page 15: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/15.jpg)
Wind x 1.0
Wind x1.6
EQ x 0.7
EQ x 1.0
ASD WindASD EQ
LRFD W ind
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 180
500
1000
1500
2000
LRFD EQ
Bas
e Sh
ear (
kips
)
Stories
For R=3 systems MCE seismic forces are 4.5 times higher, but in the East, wind almost always controls drift.
Braced Frame with Reserve System or
Moment Frame with Stiffening System
![Page 16: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/16.jpg)
1927 Steel FrameBuilding
![Page 17: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/17.jpg)
![Page 18: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/18.jpg)
![Page 19: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/19.jpg)
![Page 20: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/20.jpg)
![Page 21: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/21.jpg)
3700 kips of shear capacity at Level 21 (244’)
![Page 22: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/22.jpg)
Eastern Suite, Site Class B
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0Period, T (sec)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Sa(g
)
0.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8Sa
(g)
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0Period, T (sec)
2002 UHS PointsIBC Site Class BEastern Suite AverageWestern Suite Average
Hines , Baise and Swift (JSE—2011)
![Page 23: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/23.jpg)
NUREG SuiteAmplified via Boston Stiff Soil Profile
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.00.0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1.0
IBC-MCE-D: 2002 USGS
Suite Average
Period, T (sec)
Sa (g
)
3/R=3T=.69s
6/R=3T=1.35s
9/R=3T=2.07s
12/R=3T=2.94s
Hines , Baise and Swift (JSE—2011)
![Page 24: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/24.jpg)
First Story Drift for 6-Story Models under GM6
0 4 8 12 16 20 24Time (sec)
-3
-2
-1
0
Stor
yDr
ift(%
)
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
Stor
yDr
ift(in
)
R=2R=4
Hines , Appel and Cheever (EJ—2009)
![Page 25: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/25.jpg)
Behavior of 6-Story/R3 Model under GM5
1 First Fracture
t = 7.60s
First Story Drift
Drift [%
]
Time [sec]
1
Drif
t [in
]
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
R
6
5
4
3
2
1
2 Second Fracture
t =19.9s2
3 Collapse
t = 25.8s3
Max Drift =5.9 in
Hines , Appel and Cheever (EJ—2009)
![Page 26: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/26.jpg)
Behavior of 6-Story/WRS Model under GM5
t = 7.52s
First Story Drift
Drift [%
]
Time [sec]
1
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25
-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
-8
-6
-4
-2
0
2
4
6
8
Drif
t [in
]
1
R
6
5
4
3
2
1
t = 15.4s2
2
t = 25.4s3
3Max Drift = 0.9 in
![Page 27: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/27.jpg)
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0Scale Factor
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0Pr
obab
ility
9-Story Fragility Curves
R=2R=3R=4WRS
Hines , Appel and Cheever (EJ—2009)
![Page 28: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/28.jpg)
0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2 1.6 2.0 2.4 2.8 3.2 3.6 4.0Scale Factor
0.0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1.0
Prob
abilit
y
3-Story Fragility Curves
R=2R=3R=4WRS
![Page 29: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/29.jpg)
1/2 x Reserve
2 x Reserve
1-Story Low-Ductility CBF+Reserve System
![Page 30: NEES Quake Summit Thursday July 12, 2012 Seismic Design In Massachusetts](https://reader034.fdocuments.net/reader034/viewer/2022051700/56816209550346895dd23251/html5/thumbnails/30.jpg)
Future Practice• Reserve capacity is a clear concept
(belt and suspenders), so designers can make sense of what they are doing.
• R = 3*, R = 5/5, WRS, Stiffened MRF